If you have type 2 diabetes, you know heart health is a constant worry. A new review of past trials looked at what happens when middle-aged and older adults add resistance training, like lifting weights, to their routine. The analysis combined data from studies involving 1,396 people. It found that resistance training significantly reduced the atherogenic index of plasma, a measure of heart disease risk. It also lowered hemoglobin A1c, a marker of blood sugar control, and improved insulin resistance. Participants saw their systolic blood pressure drop, their body fat decrease, and their VO2max, a measure of fitness, increase. The review did not report on safety issues or side effects. However, the findings come with important caveats. The included studies were quite different from one another in design, the people they involved, and where they were done. This means the results should be interpreted with caution, even though they point to a clear benefit for adding strength work to diabetes care.
Resistance training reduces hemoglobin A1c by 0.62% and systolic blood pressure by 3.91 mmHg in type 2 diabetesResistance training improves heart risk markers in type 2 diabetes
AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of resistance training on metabolic and cardiovascular markers in middle-aged and older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The analysis included a total sample size of n = 1396 participants drawn from various trials. The primary outcome assessed was the atherogenic index of plasma, while secondary outcomes included hemoglobin A1c, HOMA-IR, systolic blood pressure, body fat, and VO2max.
The pooled results indicated a significant reduction in the atherogenic index of plasma with an effect size of -0.56. Hemoglobin A1c decreased by 0.62%, and HOMA-IR showed a reduction with an effect size of -0.90. Systolic blood pressure was lowered by 3.91 mmHg, body fat was reduced by 0.54%, and VO2max increased by 0.53. The authors note that the pooled evidence indicates resistance training produces clinically relevant improvements in these specific metrics.
However, the authors acknowledge substantial heterogeneity across several outcomes, differences in study design, population demographics, and geographic concentration of included studies. Varying methodological quality among the included trials also limits the certainty of the conclusions. Adverse events, serious adverse events, discontinuations, and tolerability were not reported in the source data. Consequently, the practice relevance is supporting the integration of resistance training into lifestyle interventions aimed at cardiovascular risk reduction in aging populations, but findings should be interpreted with caution.